Currently, the matter of distributing reserved seats in the national and provincial assemblies is at the forefront. The Supreme Court, through an 8-5 majority decision by the full court, has ordered that the reserved seats be given to the PTI. The detailed ruling clearly stated that the Election Commission must immediately recognize PTI’s reserved seats and issue a notification for them. The Election Commission’s decision from March 1 holds no legal standing, as it is unconstitutional.
In the detailed decision, the Peshawar High Court’s ruling was also annulled. However, the implementation of this Supreme Court decision is still pending. The government, parliament, and the Election Commission have expressed legal concerns or ambiguities regarding this decision. After several meetings, the Election Commission decided to approach the Supreme Court for further clarification on the ambiguities present in the decision. The Election Commission has sought guidance from the Supreme Court on whether it should follow the Supreme Court’s ruling or the law passed by parliament regarding the reserved seats.
Unfortunately, on one side, the government opposes granting these reserved seats to PTI, and this stance is politically understandable, as the government wants to strengthen its parliamentary majority and consolidate its power based on these reserved seats. With these seats, the government could secure a two-thirds majority and pursue significant legislation. However, if the seats are awarded to PTI according to the majority decision by the eight Supreme Court judges, the government’s parliamentary numbers would not increase, and PTI would gain a political advantage.
The government’s legal position is one thing, but it has political concerns regarding the Supreme Court’s decision. Therefore, it is trying to take full advantage of the ambiguities present in the detailed decision. However, the issue lies with the Election Commission, as it is a constitutional body and its nature is more legal or constitutional than political. It is not appropriate for the Election Commission to align itself with political matters or take a stance for or against any party. In principle, the Election Commission is an independent constitutional body, and the Supreme Court is the highest court in the country. In principle, the Supreme Court’s decision should be implemented, but the issue is the constitutional and legal intricacies that have left the situation unresolved as before.
Now the question arises: should the Election Commission seek clarification from the Supreme Court regarding the reserved seats, or should it first implement the decision on the reserved seats? This has led to a confusing situation. The Election Commission does not want to allocate reserved seats to PTI, and the government shares this stance. The Speaker of the National Assembly’s ruling also poses an obstacle, even though the Supreme Court has ordered in its detailed decision that the reserved seats be granted to PTI. Some argue that all the necessary clarifications are already provided in the detailed decision for the Election Commission. Therefore, this new attempt for further clarification is a waste of time, as the detailed decision was made by a full bench, and any clarification will also come from the same bench. There is no likelihood of a new bench being formed. Others believe that given the new legal situation, implementing the decision has become difficult.
As for the government and parliament, if they want to take a political stance, that is their right. However, the Election Commission should remain confined to constitutional clarifications. A decision in PTI’s favor has already been made, but if a new legal battle has started, PTI should fight it with full preparation. However, it seems that political interests or egos are taking precedence over the constitution and law, which is contributing to increased political division, unrest, and mistrust.
Government decisions are often based on political considerations. When it comes to reserved seats, politically it is hard to understand how parties like the PML-N, PPP, JUI, or MQM could claim these seats. Everyone politically knows and accepts that the large number of independent candidates who won were actually aligned with PTI. These individuals were politically associated with PTI at the local level, PTI had announced their names as its candidates, and the political interpretation of their independent election symbols was also tied to PTI. Today, even after winning as independents, these candidates stand with PTI and consider it their political party. Now, when PTI is not being given its reserved seats, the reason seems to be political animosity rather than any other justification. This process is further dividing politics and pushing political instability into a blind alley.
Now, the question is how the issue of PTI’s reserved seats will be resolved between the government and the Election Commission, given the detailed decision by the Supreme Court. However, in this entire game of confrontation and conflict politics, what have we done except damage the credibility of our political, state, constitutional, and legal institutions? We are still not ready to move away from the spectacle of politics, and it is clear that such political drama is further damaging our political and economic stability and the rule of law.
There is also the question of how a political party that has not held its internal elections, which is a legal and constitutional requirement before the general elections, can participate in the general elections? How can it be allocated an election symbol? PTI has still not held its internal elections. The internal elections that PTI did hold were not recognized by the Election Commission nor the Supreme Court. Now, eight Supreme Court judges have issued a decision recognizing PTI as a parliamentary party and ordering that women’s and minority reserved seats be allotted to PTI. Independent members in parliament who had submitted affidavits joining the Sunni Ittehad Council were suddenly told to join PTI. However, PTI still hasn’t held its internal elections, even after the Supreme Court’s decision. This has created an unusual and perplexing situation, and no one is ready to take responsibility for it.